I believe this is another example of shameless web-based self promoting hucksterism. He should offer a social networking class at American University: Tweet Your Way to Ethics, Tweet Your Way To Self Promotion, Tweet Your Way to Bankruptcy, etc.

You have no idea how happy I was to find this post today. Something is seriously wrong with this man...I should know, I became his latest target over the last couple of days. I am a private citizen, not a celebrity or professional journalist, which is the type of individual he evidently usually goes after. I'm not a lawyer, or an ethicist, but I am an educated person. I am also a blogger on Wordpress and about 10 minutes after the Casey Anthony verdict was read, I posted a blog about how I felt. It was a completely emotional piece, and was intended as such, nobody with half a brain would think that I had intended it as any sort of serious analysis or fact based piece. I know how to write those, and have written many well supported, unbiased academic papers in my lifetime. That's not what my blog is. So, what does Jack Marshall do? He proceeds to take my blog apart, refuting each one of my emotional points with logic. If it wasn't so insane and insulting, it would be funny. Over the course of the day, he also kept insulting my intelligence as well, saying things like I don't know what the meaning of ethics is, in fact I don't know the meaning of any words that begin with an e, t, h, i, or a c. So, it does not surprise me to see his professional credibility and perhaps even his sanity questioned. I cannot possibly imagine anyone paying this loser to either speak or teach unless it was at a masochist's convention. He has absolutely no idea how to relate to people, and appears to suffer from delusions of grandeur as well. Thank you for this posting--you've made my day!

(verb) to write, pontificate or act in such a manner that resembles unconscionable, sadomoralistic douchebaggerry of the very highest order.

Jack Marshall is a self-proclaimed champion of ethics, but he is actually just a lawyer who is invariably very rude, dismissive and intimidating.

In attempting to defend the indefensible (most often his beloved policy of drug prohibition) he does so mainly from the power of his own extreme prejudicial convictions – by blatantly ignoring fact and historical precedent he has achieved the highest form of cognitive dissonance and suffocating bigotry.

Mr Marshall’s convictions are most definitely not based upon the ethics he purports to champion, but are the ‘ethics’ of utter malice towards all who dare to disagree with his particular form of stifling, authoritarian hypocrisy.

Usage: “Do you honestly believe you can just march in here and simply jackmarshallize us?